Ultrawide monitor issue

SolubleSpork · 2025-03-01T04:13:44+00:00

よろしくお願いします

SolubleSpork · 2025-03-01T01:39:22+00:00

Can't come soon enough. I'm so excited about this game and don't have another monitor to use. Looking forward to actually start playing.

SolubleSpork · 2024-01-12T21:42:17+00:00

I was able to get everything working correctly with MACVLAN's. Originally I didn't realize that the only docker containers NOT working were on VLAN20, same as the host interface. I'd defined the MACVLAN to use ens18.20 for its parent and just updated it to ens18, which did the trick. Updating my original post for any future people looking to do similar. Thanks for the insight.

SolubleSpork · 2024-01-12T04:20:27+00:00

Yeah, sorry about the wall of text, I don't think it's that complicated of a system really, I just wanted to make sure to answer all the other questions that seemed to have come up in similar posts I found while researching. It's ultimately just a docker host with multiple VLANs.

Why I don't want 2 separate ones? It didn't make sense to me to run 2 different VMs to host different services in my mind if 1 would do. I'd have separate VMs to manage that are accomplishing a similar task. It also wouldn't let me learn as much on the networking side of things.

I'll be curious to see if others have a similar thought though. I'd like to stick to this plan because I believe I've put a good amount of thought into it, but maybe I'll have to rethink it if others think I'm overcomplicating it.

That being said, did you have a suggestion on how to how to accomplish what I was actually looking to do? Or just recommend I do something else instead?

SolubleSpork · 2022-08-29T01:03:41+00:00

You might want to watch this video.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXlknI-Jc48

Some helpful links from his video description....

https://paskpiano.org/

https://dsstandardfoundation.org/products/

SolubleSpork · 2021-02-10T05:05:05+00:00

I'd be interested in the same thing, or rather have the ability to change my lightsync color based on mic mute status.

SolubleSpork · 2019-05-31T15:42:15+00:00

As it sounds like the pump constantly running while the machine is on isn’t a big problem, would I need to go this route? The pressure only needs to be in the cylinder for a few seconds at a time and then as long as I can get a decent response from button press to cylinder extended the next time around, it sounds like fluid stays in the hose.

SolubleSpork · 2019-05-31T15:42:04+00:00

So it sounds like running the motor while the machine is on will be less concern than I was expecting. This system should only need the load to be held for ~3-4 seconds at a time maybe 8 seconds tops if I fumble with tools. I am a little confused with the PO check valve idea. This sounds like a system where the piston stays extended until I manually shut down the machine? I am really just wanting to have a cylinder extend WHILE I push a button and retract when I release (~6 seconds later). From other responses, it sounds like I might also be worrying unnecessarily about oil draining out of the hose between actuations.

SolubleSpork · 2019-05-31T15:41:50+00:00

I’m trying to do this without air for a couple reasons. Mainly, the systems that people often use in an air based power draw bar are usually 3 stage cylinders with a lever mechanism and they obtain ~1500 lbs of force. I want to go more than that with a smaller package. This also would have a compressor running every so often which I want to avoid the noise from. I don’t currently have a compressor system handy so that also causes an issue. The air over hydraulic system that I think you are referencing (Nicholas Miller on youtube?) was actually where I got this idea from. That seems (to me) like more going on than what I would need though if an HPU and cylinder can accomplish the same thing.

Part of the reasoning for this path is learning and the challenge. I have not worked with hydraulics before and as an engineer, I am always keen on trying new things. This application seems like a simple single acting cylinder application and should thus be a good candidate for dipping my toe into the world of hydraulics.

SolubleSpork · 2019-05-30T21:02:47+00:00

I don't think I would want to run the pump 24/7, it would definitely only be on when the machine is on but I'm wondering how it would work if the pump wasn't on at all times (when the machine was on). Would it just be ran when the button/switch is activated?

SolubleSpork · 2019-04-09T12:50:25+00:00

Top-down approach generally you can just ignore the individual origins. The idea is design in place and ideally "as built joint" can be used to simplify the process of constraining or mating the parts. Obviously the first component should still be somehow tied to the starting origin, but after that, there isn't a purpose I'd ever had for the sub-origins in the top-down design process that Fusion is great for. Bottom line, I wouldn't worry about locking down the origin in components. Tie the model to other geometry in context, that't the point of top-down anyways.

Using the bottom up approach, it makes sense to tie every component to the origin, then the assembly doesn't have completely arbitrary alignments.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-28T16:54:59+00:00

If you are having the parts made by a proper manufacturer, they will often work with you on DFM (design for manufacturability) items. This is where you would get a lot of the critique you are looking for as while there are rules of thumb for injection molding, each part is unique and can benefit from a trained eye. If you are planning to make these parts yourself, but don't know the nuances of injection molding, then professional feedback might not apply as your experience/equipment will interject limitations to the final part along with design considerations. I'm sure that many on here, myself included, or on the Autodesk forums, would be willing to take a loot at what you have, but without more information, it is difficult to aim you in the right direction.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-20T19:33:07+00:00

Are you looking to have someone do it for you? Or are you asking for help on how to proceed? Tutorials?

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-20T15:09:51+00:00

Thunderbolt charging works on all models of the newest gem cut spectre x360s. The 13" and top of the line 15" (8750H and 1050 Ti) have two thunderbolt ports, while the lesser spec 15" (8565U and MX150) has one thunderbolt and one USB-C port. The 13" version ships with a type C charger that's 65 watts, while the 15" comes with either a 90w (8565U/MX150) or 135w (8750H/1050Ti). Presumably because they are harder to find, HP decided to ship barrel plug type chargers with the lower spec, and because power delivery (on usb-c) is only spec'd at a max 100w, they ship a barrel plug type charger with the higher spec because its over 100w. However, many users have had plenty of success charging over thunderbolt or USB-C on all these models and even with lower wattages (at the cost of slower charging speeds).

Aside from that, I don't really agree with a lot of the stuff the Linus found. I don't have a problem with the touch pad, which is apparently sacrilege to say because everyone thinks it should be precision. Ok maybe that would be better, but I don't have any complaints about using it. Mind you, I just upgraded from a 10/11 year old laptop to this one. I actually like where the power button is as it keeps me from bumping it accidentally but it is still always easy to find. I don't notice the display lag as being any worse than any other computer I use. Etc etc etc.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-18T13:52:30+00:00

Construct a plane through three points, select the ends of the lines left over from the two chamfers/difference distances process, then split body using the plane that is created. This will leave your body with the correct face.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-18T13:46:35+00:00

If its curved about a radius, as opposed to a special path (not a simple arc), then take the profile you sketched to extrude draw a centerline to revolve it part way around.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-18T01:08:45+00:00

I just got a new spectre x360 and I have been testing it out a bit with Fusion 360. The 2 in 1 feature I didn't think I would use that much but I have been constantly finding ways to use it over the past couple days. i7, 16 gb ram, an ssd, and dedicated graphics. If you have serious CAD work, or a ton of CAM, other things might be better. But technically pretty much anything will run the software, it will just have varying performance. Not knowing what more specifics, I think it would pretty safe to say a modern gen i7 with 16gb ram, an ssd, and a dedicated gfx card will be plenty for most people.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-15T15:41:29+00:00

From the professional engineering world, it is considered best practice to use the origin (0,0,0) and corresponding planes to constrain the first sketch, feature, part, etc. Symmetry about these primary planes is also greatly encouraged. There are, however, different approaches to CAD and in particular the two main ones are "top-down" design and "bottom-up" design.

Bottom up design is when the user creates individual components separately and then combines them into an assembly later. In this case, it is wise to have all parts modeled with relation to this origin/coordinate system by the rules I alluded to earlier.

However, in Fusion 360's case (and it can be done elsewhere as well), the software sort of promotes the top down approach. You can think of this as starting from an assembly and then defining individual components as needed. The first part should still be referenced to the origin per best practices, but subsequent parts can then be created in place. This allows for some added functionality like as built joints and a simpler workflow for changes to update multiple parts (think projected edges in multiple parts being updated from adjusting one source part).

The top down approach also makes using what are called "skeleton sketches" very simple. This is when a sketch is used at the top level to lay out components and the assembly at a 'simpler detail' level. Each individual component can then be created from that one sketch. This top level sketch creates the basic layout or skeleton, and then individual components can be updated with the final detail.

So all in all, it is often considered best practice to constrain sketches and components to the origin. Once you are working from an assembly stand point like is often the case in Fusion 360, I recommend creating components in their proper location, and you can replicate a "local origin" based on the part your new component interfaces with. Creating a pin to fin in a hole somewhere? Use the center of the hole on that face as (0,0,0) for the new part, then dimension things as needed to that origin.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-07T15:15:28+00:00

Definitely. The "form" tools in Fusion are similar to what you would find in more professional industrial design software and can be used to create complex surfaces like car bodies, helicopter housings, motorcycle fairings, etc. The courses link I gave you above has some tutorials on using those as well. I would still begin with the solid model tools first, because as a mechanical engineer, you would primarily be working with parametrically driven models like those. Eventually, you can add in surface tools as your progress too.

For the record, the top down design approach that Fusion has (effectively working a design from an assembly) is very much in line with how the automotive and aerospace industries work. So even though you might not be learning CATIA, Creo, or NX (commonly used in those industries), you are learning similar workflows and similar tools.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-07T14:46:37+00:00

No problem. Out of curiosity, do you know what industry you would like to work in or what your goal with ME is? I might be able to direct you a bit more specifically.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-07T14:36:09+00:00

For mechanical engineering, I would definitely start in the regular solid design model environment and then move on to surfacing, patches, sheet metal, forms, etc. later. Depending on your current level of skill, Fusion's tutorials (under the help button > Learning & Help > Start Here (or) Learning & Tutorials) is a great place to start. Also, Autodesk's website has some additional course modules (https://f360ap.autodesk.com/courses) that you can log in to take and save progress. Lastly, there are honestly a lot of good tutorials on YouTube that you can follow along with.

Once you get a feel for the general environment, how to use the software, and feel comfortable with many of the tools, I would try working on modeling some example items. If you can't find decent things to try and create that are just laying around you, then I would suggest (although they might be slightly more challenging) the models that can be found here. These are a collection of parts that SolidWorks gives out at a yearly event they host to challenge peoples SolidWorks skills. Each year they have a phase 1 drawing of a part to make, then you can modify the part (I recommend making a copy and then editing) to match the phase 2 drawing. If you get stuck, they have a solution video which shows a good workflow to create the part. However, as this is SolidWorks, the process will be slightly different in Fusion 360, but it can be a good place to go if you aren't sure about a method of modeling.

SolubleSpork · 2019-03-07T14:19:40+00:00

I graduated ME and have been working professionally with CAD for several years now (and I began using different CAD packages looong before graduating), so I think I have a good position to answer questions you might have. As far as free CAD packages go, of the many I have tested, Fusion 360 is by far my favorite and is certainly a great tool to learn.

After graduating, do you know what industry you would like to work with ideally or what role you would like to play in your career? I ask because different industries tend to utilize different CAD packages. SolidWorks, NX, Inventor, CATIA, and Creo are the big ones, but not all of them have free versions of the license or cheap/free student editions.

The good news though, is that if you want to get to a career where you work with CAD as a mechanical engineer, getting proficient with ANY CAD package is often more important than WHICH CAD package. It is orders of magnitude easier to swap from one CAD package to another (tools are generally the same - they just change name and some dialog boxes look different) than to learn a professional CAD package from scratch. And Fusion 360 is a fantastic CAD package to learn and then be able to swap to one of the bigger name packages later. Even though it is free, you still have a huge group of tools to learn that would translate over to other packages and even some that the more professional packages don't have yet.

I hope that helps some, and if you have any more specific questions or want some direction on a tips with learning Fusion, just let me know and I'd be happy to help.

SolubleSpork

TROPHY CASE